An Evaluation of Evidence for the Age of the Universe

[Guest treesong]

Speed of light in vacuum is just a conversion factor. It translates space coordinates into time coordinates.

To say that this is not a constant is as absurd as saying that the conversion factor between kilometers

and miles is not a constant.

Outside of the stuff in the paper I linked to, there's lots of hypotheses about the early universe that deal with very high values for c called VSL models. There is no consensus or majority that c was X amount higher or lower in the past, but scientists are clearly not ruling out the possibility and there is evidence that such may be the case.

Here is an interesting article

Alpha, it seems, has decreased by more than 4.5 parts in 108 since Oklo was live (Physical Review D, vol 69, p121701).

That translates into a very small increase in the speed of light (assuming no change in the other constants that alpha depends on), but Lamoreaux's new analysis is so precise that he can rule out the possibility of zero change in the speed of light. "It's pretty exciting," he says.

This goes against classical physics and such, but the great thing about science is that nothing is set in stone and it goes wherever the evidence leads. Right now it looks like the evidence suggests that c has changed over time. Our understanding of how the universe works is changing and as long as that change is based on evidence it should be pursued.

This is a very interesting and difficult topic.

The speed of light is an important factor in the metric of the space-time manifold. In other words it gives a meaning

to measures of space-time distances between events and their causality. If that changes, than we cannot anymore

clearly extrapolate our measurements of space and time in different "epochs", in other words, things like

"6000 years ago" do not make any sense, anymore.

Even worse, that will kill the "fine tuning argument" of theism. If such constants can vary, then there is no

"initial" fine tuning anymore. This could also provide a nice anthropic explanation of life: life takes place

only in "epochs" where this constants have the right value, not "before" and not "after". No need to

call upon multiverses or other less intuitive ideas.

The Catholic church, IMHO wisely, does not tackle this issues to prove Bible literacy. That could

open a very dangerous pandora box of negative consequences for theism itself, at least at

philosophical level.

[spiritman]

Ok lurker, I guess I need to clarify my point a little more. Let's say that light leaves a star and is traveling at what scientists call light speed, what is that 186,000 miles/ps. Ok now this light interacts with something within a quarter of its traveling time from the star, this speeds it up to say 300 times the normal speed of light. the travel time would be greatly deminished.

That clears up nothing except that you clearly didn't understand the article you linked to which is discussing how the fine structure constant (alpha) may have varied slightly in the past which, in turn, could have had a slight effect on the speed of light. The underlying argument I am trying to convey is that everything in this universe is built upon physics, and if you mess with those physics you mess with the whole universe. Messing with the speed of light, for example, to try and get a young universe is going to cause some pretty catastrophic problems elsewhere. If you change the fine structure constant your going to change the strength of the force between all electrically charged particles, I'm really hoping you caught that "all", as in every freaking electrically charged particle in the universe. If you push that value over 4% in either direction stars are no longer physically able to sustain themselves so. . .once again. . .good luck with that. Additionally, you don't seem to realize that if these findings are accurate it would mean that the fine structure constant was 0.0006% smaller 9 billion years ago than it is today. If you're going to propose that light sped up beyond that amount you'll need to take all the findings you just cited and drop kick them into a black hole of confirmation bias.

Lurker

You just stated that C may have varied in the past, and that this had a slight effect on the speed of light, therefore as I stated before Light speed can vary and is no longer constant, thanks for making my point. I truely believe that if God decided to push the speed of light beyond what you call the 'c" He can do it without tearing up the universe.

[spiritman]

Then Dner,

the question begs to differ why are you holding on to scientific theories that are in conflict to each other?

One scientist says one thing then another says something different. Sounds like a bunch of confusion to me!!

I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you give an example?

This is a very interesting and difficult topic.

The speed of light is an important factor in the metric of the space-time manifold. In other words it gives a meaning

to measures of space-time distances between events and their causality. If that changes, than we cannot anymore

clearly extrapolate our measurements of space and time in different "epochs", in other words, things like

"6000 years ago" do not make any sense, anymore.

Even worse, that will kill the "fine tuning argument" of theism. If such constants can vary, then there is no

"initial" fine tuning anymore. This could also provide a nice anthropic explanation of life: life takes place

only in "epochs" where this constants have the right value, not "before" and not "after". No need to

call upon multiverses or other less intuitive ideas.

The Catholic church, IMHO wisely, does not tackle this issues to prove Bible literacy. That could

open a very dangerous pandora box of negative consequences for theism itself, at least at

philosophical level.

I think the important thing to notice is that outside of the very early universe (which we simply don't know yet), the speed of light has changed very little.

So you admit the speed of light has changed, therefore follow my logic here ( If it has changed once, ) it can change again, And these are my two points:

1. The speed of light can vary depending on it's enviorment. ( there's no telling what kind of enviroments are out there in space)

2. And if the speed of light can change based on it's enviorment, and we don't know all the eviroments out there in space.

3. then it is illogical to assume that light traveling from a great distance, has not interacted with some enviorment to either speed it up or slow it down.

The chances that it has not interacted with such an enviroment are astonomical.

4. Therefore we should not assume that the speed of light is constant

5. Therefore it is illogical to use the speed of light in determining the age of the universe.

[other one]

Black holes can have such gravity that light is drawn into it. How can we know the speed of light earlier in the universe because we really don't have a clue as to the early form of the universe. We make assumptions assuming that what we are observing has always worked the same.

Wh have an idea of how light travels on planet earth and somewhat how it reavels in our solar system, but outside that we really haven't a clue.

The two pioneer space crafts got to the limits of our solar system and for wome strance reason started slowing down..

Does light to the same? We don't know.

Same as with carbon 14 testing. We have the idea that it's linear as it...... but do we really know...... not really. One has to assume that it's 5736 year half life decays in a linaer fashon, but we really haven't been around even to see one cycle of half life. And we have to assume that the cosmic rays coming into the earth are stable and don't change for if they did then we'd have more of it. Before the flood if we had the water vaper above the atmosphere that I've heard about, there would be much less carbon 14 because the cosmic rays would be less and we'd think things were much older than wha they are.

We have a lot of variables that may or may not be what we consicer realiry.

[MorningGlory]

You just stated that C may have varied in the past, and that this had a slight effect on the speed of light, therefore as I stated before Light speed can vary and is no longer constant, thanks for making my point. I truely believe that if God decided to push the speed of light beyond what you call the 'c" He can do it without tearing up the universe.

Sure thing, God certainly could have "pushed" the speed of light far beyond C. He just would have had to also make sure to supernaturally keep stars from collapsing and a host of other effects this would have produced. . .and then He would have needed to hide all of that to make it look like C has never changed more than 0.0006% some nine billion years ago. In other words, yes God could have built a deceptive universe in order to trick us.

Lurker

God would never do anything to deceive us; deceit isn't in Him. That being said, if God wanted to upend physical laws, or go around and through them, he can do that. They're His laws, after all.

[Guest]

Jesus

Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. James 1:17

Is

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. 1 Corinthians 12:3

LORD

He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end. Ecclesiastes 3:11

>>>>>()<<<<<

.... In other words, yes God could have built a deceptive universe in order to trick us....

Don't Call

Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. John 8:34

The Creator Ungodly Demon Names

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Ephesians 3:9

You May Know Him (Or Not) As The Almighty GOD, My LORD And Creator, Jesus The Christ

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:1-5

And Shame On You As You Continue To Let Man's Philosophy Trick You Through It's Mockery Of His Clear Word

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Colossians 2:8

And As You Join In With Other Bible Deniers Spinning Webs Of Dark Tails Of Some Vile god Called Chaos Tricking The Children Into Thinking It Is The Father Of Us All

Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding? Isaiah 29:16

Instead Of The Careful, Honest, Truthful And Loving Reporting

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Romans 1:20

Of What You Have Directly Observed

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. Mark 10:6

And I Know Of Only One Trickster

Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? Genesis 3:1

With Many Puppets

He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. Luke 11:23

>>>>>()<<<<<

Dear One Will You Ever Determine To Take Your Stand On The Clear Word Of God No Matter The Cost To Your Pride Or Reputation

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160

Or Must You Continue To Put Your Trust In The Preaching Of Non-Biblical Godless

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20-21

Evil Fables

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 2 Timothy 4:3-4

>>>>>()<<<<<

Believe

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: John 11:25

And Be Blessed Beloved

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 1 Peter 1:23-24

Love, Joe

Praying!

[spiritman]

So you admit the speed of light has changed, therefore follow my logic here ( If it has changed once, ) it can change again, And these are my two points:

1. The speed of light can vary depending on it's enviorment. ( there's no telling what kind of enviroments are out there in space)

2. And if the speed of light can change based on it's enviorment, and we don't know all the eviroments out there in space.

For the most part space is a vacuum. And really, most of the things we know that effect the speed of light slow it down. Whenever light goes into a medium it slows down (based on the mass and density of medium) and in space mediums (like interstellar gas) can absorb the photons (putting it at a complete stop) and release the photon latter at an unknown time.

3. then it is illogical to assume that light traveling from a great distance, has not interacted with some enviorment to either speed it up or slow it down.

We've seen evidence that of light being slowed down and/or stopping part way. We haven't seen anything to suggest that it goes faster in some places. Under certain special conditions in the lab scientists can make the light go faster than c, but you cannot send information (we see lots of information in light from stellar objects) faster than the speed of light.

The chances that it has not interacted with such an enviroment are astonomical.

Really!? Assuming the universe is 10,000 years old, and 13 billion light years is the farthest we can observe, the light needed to go at an average of 1.3 million times faster than the speed of light in a vacuum. If that is what you are really proposing (universe is young), there is nothing to suggest that anything on that magnitude has ever happened.

4. Therefore we should not assume that the speed of light is constant

The speed of light in a vacuum is essentially a constant. The problem for you is that scientists can see throughout the history of the universe if the speed of light has changed in any significant way. While the speed of light has changed slightly (less than 1%), there is no evidence of drastic changes needed to void using starlight as one way of determining a minimum age. For our purposes it is essentially unchanged.

5. Therefore it is illogical to use the speed of light in determining the age of the universe.

Scientists don't use the speed of light to determine the age of the universe. It is a good way to establish a minimum age though, and it is a fairly easy concept to get across that can take us back to 13 billion years. From what I understand scientists get the age of the universe by analyzing the cosmic background radiation (CMB) and the expansion rate, which gives us about 13.7 billion years old. Neither of which use the speed of light to find the age of the universe.

Dner,

Please consider these points:

1. At the begining of creation, God made everything and sped the light up to reach the earth instantly.

2. but over time light was slowed to it's present speed.

Therefore since you agree and luker agree that God can supernatural change or interact with the laws of physics, then this is something that needs to be considered. it's not that God is trying to decieve you, but scientists just see things the way they are now because they weren't there in the begining.

[Guest Aiwa]

You just stated that C may have varied in the past, and that this had a slight effect on the speed of light, therefore as I stated before Light speed can vary and is no longer constant, thanks for making my point. I truely believe that if God decided to push the speed of light beyond what you call the 'c" He can do it without tearing up the universe.

Sure thing, God certainly could have "pushed" the speed of light far beyond C. He just would have had to also make sure to supernaturally keep stars from collapsing and a host of other effects this would have produced. . .and then He would have needed to hide all of that to make it look like C has never changed more than 0.0006% some nine billion years ago. In other words, yes God could have built a deceptive universe in order to trick us.

Hello;

I'm new here, and a little confused about this conversation.

Is the idea being discussed that the speed of light can vary? If so, that's a pretty heavy claim to make. Are you really confident that you are in a position to refute the theory of relativity?

The point of calling the speed of light 'c' is that it is a constant. Physicists say we should not think of it as a velocity, but rather as a conversion factor between space and time. That is, it appears to be a LOGICAL constant.

Take another logical constant, Pi in geometry. Pi specifies the ratio between cicumference and diameter in a circle. We can be wrong about pi, or not know its true value, but the value itself will not change. We can't change Pi without changing the logical relationship of figures that are defined in terms of each other.

[MorningGlory]

You just stated that C may have varied in the past, and that this had a slight effect on the speed of light, therefore as I stated before Light speed can vary and is no longer constant, thanks for making my point. I truely believe that if God decided to push the speed of light beyond what you call the 'c" He can do it without tearing up the universe.

Sure thing, God certainly could have "pushed" the speed of light far beyond C. He just would have had to also make sure to supernaturally keep stars from collapsing and a host of other effects this would have produced. . .and then He would have needed to hide all of that to make it look like C has never changed more than 0.0006% some nine billion years ago. In other words, yes God could have built a deceptive universe in order to trick us.

Hello;

I'm new here, and a little confused about this conversation.

Is the idea being discussed that the speed of light can vary? If so, that's a pretty heavy claim to make. Are you really confident that you are in a position to refute the theory of relativity?

The point of calling the speed of light 'c' is that it is a constant. Physicists say we should not think of it as a velocity, but rather as a conversion factor between space and time. That is, it appears to be a LOGICAL constant.

Take another logical constant, Pi in geometry. Pi specifies the ratio between cicumference and diameter in a circle. We can be wrong about pi, or not know its true value, but the value itself will not change. We can't change Pi without changing the logical relationship of figures that are defined in terms of each other.

Everything you say is true....but only to the extent that man can define and measure anything. WE are not in control of space, time or science.

[Guest Aiwa]

Everything you say is true....but only to the extent that man can define and measure anything. WE are not in control of space, time or science.

I'm not sure I agree. The point of the pi example is that it's supposed to indicate a logical relation. If the relation is logical, it shouldn't depend on definition or measurement at all. We could change our numbering system or our language or whatever and the logical relation would remain.

I'm really just saying that if you have a coconut and add another coconut, you now have two coconuts. It doesn't matter what our language is, or how we right down the relevant relation. We might REPRESENT the relation differently, but the relation itself remains the same.